Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Promoting democracy: Maybe later

by Paul Wells on Thursday, December 30, 2010 1:12pm - 21 Comments

In the Globe, a former staffer at Rights and Democracy and a former staffer at the Forum of Federations note the state of Canadian democracy promotion:

The Canadian International Development Agency’s Office of Democratic Governance, which channelled much of Canada’s democracy funding, was disbanded. The Department of Foreign Affairs’ Democracy Unit was folded into the Francophonie and Commonwealth division.

The Democracy Council, a forum for discussion and collaboration among Canadian democracy promotion agencies, disappeared despite interest from both government and non-government actors to see it expand.

The Parliamentary Centre’s Sudan and Haiti programs were “de-prioritized.” And our former organizations, Rights & Democracy and the Forum of Federations, have been rendered impotent by partisan and ideological board appointments and de-funding respectively.

And what of the new agency that was to make Canada a world leader in democracy promotion? Some say it was the victim of the disaster imposed on Rights & Democracy by its board; others cite the focus on austerity sweeping Ottawa. Either way, it has been put on the “back burner”.

One of the reasons stated for establishing this new agency was that many Canadian democracy experts were working for American agencies, instead of employing their talents on Canada’s behalf. Far from repatriating our home-grown expertise, we are in the process of exporting whatever is left.

The events at Rights and Democracy have been chronicled here in some detail. Cutting funding for the Forum of Federations is debatable. If your position is that the feds have a foreign-affairs department and don’t need to be spending tax dollars on fancy outboard operations, then there you go. If your position is that federalism is a smart way to run a country but one with many moving parts that deserve comparative study, then cutting money to the Forum makes a lot less sense.

But some of Galetti and Lemieux’s claims are about the internal organization of the federal government’s own proprietary outfits, so grumbling “shut down all agencies” doesn’t quite cut the mustard. Theoretically DFAIT’s Democracy Unit was doing the departmental work on promoting democracy, or should have been; a government that was busy neutering agencies but wanted to strengthen in-house democracy promotion would presumably not have acted this way.

And then there’s the Canadian Centre for Advancing Democracy, which the feds promised in their next-to-most-recent throne speech and which got as far as a report, penned by the inescapable Trudeau acolyte Tom Axworthy with help from such interesting figures as Pam Wallin, Eric Duhaime and Leslie Campbell, who has some ties to the NDP. That report was tabled a little over a year ago and I haven’t heard more about it since.

You could argue that democracy promotion offers tremendous advantages to first movers, and that no late-arriving country will ever match the Americans and the Germans, who were in the game in the late 1980s and who’ve contributed greatly to most of the democratic revolutions since then.

You could argue that the whole field of democracy promotion is tapped out — that the world’s remaining despots are on to NDI’s and IRI’s games, and that in Belarus and Russia and Iran they’ve been much more effective at blocking foreign-driven democracy-promotion campaigns than their doomed predecessors in Romania and Iraq.

And, finally, you could argue that democracy promotion is simply none of Canada’s business, that a country’s governance is its internal business and that we should not set up a new agency for meddling.

But the Harper government has not made any of the above arguments and has, instead, argued in a 2007 parliamentary committee report and a 2008 throne speech and a 2009 consultants’ report that we should be getting into democracy promotion big-time. The government’s rhetoric has been consistent. Its actions simply contradict its words.

 

 

Bookmark and Share
  • A_logician

    The government’s rhetoric has been consistent. Its actions simply contradict its words.

    The government has also been consistent in its contradiction.

  • Emily

    I think we should stop meddling, and get out of the 'democracy promotion' business altogether…but as you say, Harper hasn't made that argument.

    Instead he talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk etc

  • Jan

    Paul, maybe you could contact Pamela Wallin to comment on this. She seemed very certain that action was critical, when she appeared on CBC with Bob Rae the other day.

  • Mike T.

    The entire organization will now be replaced by Stephen Harper tut-tutting China while advancing closer economic ties to take advantage of its inhumane practices.

  • PeteTong

    The government has been consistent in its support for Israel which is a democracy.

    • Emily

      I wouldn't call Israel a democracy in anything but name….but Harp would support it no matter what it was.

    • Emily

      I wouldn't call Israel a democracy, but Harp would support it no matter what it was.

  • captcold

    Given the ghetto grade 'democracy' run domestically, it's a laugh that we'd have someone to think about having 'homegrown' expertise in it.

    • andrew

      Puh-leeze. Can we do better? Sure. Does that mean we don't have lots and lots of expertise we can export? No.

  • AIO

    Galletti and Lemieux look like they might have something of an axe to grind, but their arguments are bang on. A government with a plan does not act in this manner, especially on what on a good day should be a very minor policy issue – and instead was given the front page treatment: the Speech from the Throne, its own government minister, its own multi-partisan report.

    The idea which is really bizarre in all of this is the idea that we need to repatriate all of this Canadian expertise. Why? To make ourselves feel good about ourselves? To put ourselves on the back as the world's true democrats? This is not like the private sector, where people trained on the public dime in Canada then go and make millions for foreign companies, not accruing any benefit to our economy.

    Thousands of Canadians do incredible work everyday in all sorts of NGOs and IGOs and companies. These are the best representatives Canada could ever have. If only the Canadian Government could figure out how to make the most of it.

  • AIO

    One more small thing – has anyone even read the Axworthy and company report (thanks for linking to it Wells)?

    150 to 350 million $s over 5 years. For something that we don't even know works.

    Check out CIDA's latest offering to the entire Canadian NGO community for what should be the sharp edge of the arrow of development – like food, jobs, and health for people in poor countries. The sums don't come close to the figures proposed by Axworthy.

    • Jenn_

      I couldn't get past the overwhelming impression that this is the exact same mandate as Rights and Democracy. At least, I didn't get past the point where it wasn't.

      So, apart from Harper spending millions of our dollars to create a thing after destroying the same thing that was already operational (but with someone else's name on it), I don't get it. And this isn't even a Liberal thing replaced by a Conservative thing, since the name on it was Mulroney.

  • http://transmontanus.blogspot.com Terry Glavin

    Excellent commentary, Paul. Thanks for this.

  • NorthernPoV

    Two PW post made within a few minutes of each other.
    The post that continues the endless horse-race election speculation garners 104* comments while this post above, that reflects a substantive discussion on the dismal state this gov't has brought us to, gets 13* comments.

    (*numbers at the time of this comment)

    • TimesArrow

      A depressing point well made.

  • DBM

    "The government’s rhetoric has been consistent. Its actions simply contradict its words."

    Harper's ongoing mission to prove that you can break a heart and have it.

  • matt

    Dear PW: 1. excellent post. 2. some links to provide background information on the facts you refer to would improve it.

    Dear Maclean's: more of this will make me an enthusiastic subscriber.

  • gds121

    Economies of scale matter for government agencies unless one has a geographic or thematic niche. As Canada has none of the above in this field, we should look at providing support to regional organizations such as IDASA in South Africa which can scale up their activities regionally. Cutting cheques and monitoring the accounting is something CIDA is getting good at, even if on a small scale and with insuffucuent focus on effectiveness.

  • Rgca

    Maybe Canada has no place promoting democracy but, if so, what the hell are we doing in afghanistan?

  • Guest

    The sheer number of organizations and government units a cited in this posting that were all doing essentially the same job is pretty decent evidence that the organizational chart could stand to be pared back a bit.

  • TimesArrow

    AC is bang on about SH. He isn't a real conservative neither is he a liberal, except in a rhetorical sense. A real con would simply make the argument and roll up ineffective organizations/forums that promote democracy and defend his actions. Instead Harper breaks orgs that are working [ if imperfectly] and boasts of similar [ likely much more expensive] projects that he has little real enthusiam for.

    'He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom'
    Tolkien

From Macleans